= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Unnamed comments on New Less Wrong Feature: Rerunning The Sequences - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (46)
Giving credit to the summarizers could be tricky since the wiki doesn't identify who wrote what. I guess there's information about who made each edit available in the article history, but that would take some work to dig up. Is there a simpler way to do it?
One way is that, if you add a summary, sign it (with ~~~~). I went ahead and did that with the summary I added today. Others who think they can offer an improved summary can append and sign theirs.
The disadvantage is that it adds clutter and breaks the convention of keeping signatures on the discussion pages and off the main. And assigning individual credit for summaries isn't strictly necessary, but it's a great motivator.
Another thing that we could do is make a thread in the discussion section about this, which will give people someplace to post their summaries and receive plaudits. That could also attract more attention and encourage more people to get involved.